Request for neurotypical insight

Post Reply New Topic

Hello there

First off, let me say that this isn't about children. It doesn't have to do with parenting, and it in no way will affect your child, nor offer you any practical advice. This is merely a selfish request on my part for some insight into what appears to be a nuerotypical thing.

I have come across a situation which I cannot figure out and I think its because I am not looking at it from a nuerotypical standpoint (at least I think thats the problem). It just doesn't make any sense to me. So, what I need is the insight of somebody who thinks normally to figure this one out. I posted this on the main forums, but most people there aren't neurotypical. So in order to get neurotypical people to read it, I've come to the parents forums to ask for help.

Anyways, all that to say: If you get the chance, please go read my post at http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt164427.html and let me know what you think.

Tracker, I have done hiring, employers want people who will do what they ask (within reason). Whereas the very first thing they asked you to do which was a small thing - you refused to do it.
Not only that but the person you were emailing would have been part of the process around that test so would have some 'investment' in it. So you probably insulted her; you overstepped your brief in questioning their tests. You are implying you (prospective mechanical engineer) know more than them (the HR people) in their own area of expertise.

And you did that at the time a person would normally be expected to be trying hard to 'make a good impression'. The unspoken statement behind these actions is at the least 'I will be a 'difficult' employee' and at the most 'I don't care about your job'.

Thats the way it would have come across to most NTs, especially ones in HR depts. Definitely they turned you down because of this.

Tracker,
First of all, from an NT viewpoint, I say that I would answer the questions thinking about how to make a good impression on employer (forgive my english...)
You have enviable logic skills, but in that case they are not asking to you to practice that skills.
Of course you can't give an answer based on inference, but you have to provide all the informations you need to answer.
For instance, the third question is "Do you prefer teamwork?" is related to your enjoyment doing teamworking rather than working alone. The informations you miss are related to things you should know about yourself and they can't provide. Your answers will help them to guess that informations about you.
The next time, answer "yes" to that question, teamworking is welcome for employers, except few cases. (as I said before, the goal is to make a good impression...)
I went through job interw when I had your age and it's an happy memory for me... take it as a chess game. You have to make a good impression and employer has to understand your character.
You are an engineer... you are supposed to solve problems with few information, that is what an employer requires. You have to be good making working hypothesis where you don't have informations. Then, you have to test that hypothesis, but that's not possible when you make an interview. Then, only intuition can help you.
My job works this way also...
So, as nostromo wrote, it is not a good thing to ask for more details...
Claudia

Hmmm, the first thing I thought was uh oh, he's questioned their process and intelligence in their testing process, this guys sounds like a smart ar$e who thinks he knows more than us. A lot of NT's don't like it pointed out to them just how illogical they can be.

Those questions were stupid and there was no right or wrong answer so to speak. Next time try not to think to much into them, just answer with the first answer that comes to you. Not every thing is black and white most people know this but they don't all like it pointed out to them.

Good luck with the job hunting, you will make someone a fantastic employee.

Oh no! That is really too bad. You made a Big No No. First let me say, I am surprised they used one of those idiotic tests for an engineering postion. They are usually the type of tests they use to screen out individuals at low level retail type jobs.

Let me offer you some insight in case you come across this again. In most companies, HR people are typically annoying and usually don't know anything about the positions they are filling. They are weeding out candidates before sending them to a manager in the actual department to be interviewed. They have been given a list of criteria (education, experience, etc.) that is necessary to the postion and they use that to find applicable candidates. However, they like to think they are very important as they can be seen as the God of the company, allowing only those they want to enter. The only way to bypass the HR filter is if you have networked and have a contact that can get you an interview. You will still have to go through HR to do your paperwork (normal hiring paperwok, no tests) if you get hired, but otherwise you have circumvented being looked over by the HR person. If you have no contact, then you must play their game, play nice to the HR people, kiss their behinds until you are passed by them onto the real interviews for the postion, which will be with the actual managers you would be working for. However, you must run the HR guantlet to get through the gates. That mean no questioning them.

Anyone I know with any type of intelligence despises those tests. They are just as you described. Vague, easily manipulated and pointless. However, many HR departments use them as a way of being lazy. I am assuming there are actually some people that are dumb enough to admit they have stolen or would steal from an employer. I know my FIL once laughed and talked about an interview he did for a position in his department and the guy actually confessed to all kinds of stupid things.

Again, I am surprised that the company is using them for something other than a low level position. On one hand, you could say I wouldn't want to work at a company that uses such stupid tests. However, the reality is that it is some brainchild of the idiotic HR department to implement this test. Most people that I have met that work in HR and very defensive as most people detest them and don't think highly of their service to the company. Questioning their methods made them not want to let your enter their kingdom.

I also wanted to add in case you ever come across those questions again. They aren't looking for scientific answers. They really want to know how honest you are and instead of pointedly asking "Do you lie to get what you want?" They are asking for your viewpoint from the "most people" phrasing as the are assuming that if someone feels most people do these things that they too would most likely engage is such behaviour. Again, it is an idiotic test. I am surprised they are using it on someone with any education, especially in engineering.

I know someone who has a college degree. Her and her husband needed to make some extra money at one time and applied as holiday help for Wal Mart. They too had to take one of those stupid tests on their computers. Neither passed the computer test. They were told if you score too high on it, Wal Mart doesn't want you. Now I know why I detest Wal Mart and can never find any good customer service there.

I am a SAHM. I have a degree, but am not ready to go back into the workforce full time. I wanted to do a little something, so I was going to work a holiday job this past Christmas season. One place I applied at was JC Penney. I had to do all the intial paperwork online. This included a test. Other than the honesty type questions, they also had scenario questions on how you would handle customers. I always chose answers that would follow procedure and give good customer service. However, each one also had an answer about going to get a manager. I had assumed they were looking for someone to be independent and not run to a manager for everything. Nope, I didn't pass. It turns out, they wanted people who would ask a manager for every little thing.

I ended up going to William Sonoma for the holidays. No tests were given to me and wow, every person I worked with all had interesting backgrounds and had actual intelligence.

Companies are really mistaken in relying on those tests IMO. However, sometimes you just have to play their game.

Yes but that doesn't answer my question

I understand that these are test designed to determine my personality. I understand that I should have filled out the questionnaire if I wanted the interview as not to make waves. I understand that there are 'right' answers that give the employer the information they want to hear. I understand that lying and giving false answers is necessary to get past these tests. And I know how to chose the false answers in a way which the HR apartment will approve of. That's not what I am confused about.

My confusion is simply WHY would HR departments give this test? They have to know that any person with intelligence is aware that these tests are a trap and that there are right/wrong answers from the company perspective. And they have to know that any person with intelligence will answer these questions falsely in such a way as to tell HR what they want to hear. And as such, they have to know that the test results will be invalid because anybody with any intelligence will game the test.

So why does HR make people do these tests if they know that what they will get is invalid at best, and manipulative at worst? The only way these tests will work is if the person doesn't realize its a trap and answers honestly, but why would they hire engineers like that?

I'm not confused about how I should answer or what I should answer if I want the job. I am confused about why this is a requirement. I just can't figure out why the HR department thinks these tests are at all helpful.

Imagine if a standard HR policy was to have you chose a snake and then get bitten by it. If you didn't get sick, it showed that you are hearty and thus they would hire you. And so everybody gives advice like 'pick this kind of snake, its venom is less potent'. Or they give advice like 'remember to take anti-venom before you go to the interview'. My question isn't what snake to pick, or which anti-venom to take. My question is why in the world are we doing the stupid snake test? HR has to realize that the ability to withstand snake bites is not a valid indicator of job performance. So why do the snake test?

Likewise, HR has to realize that these personality tests are not a valid indicator of personality or performance, and only serve to guarantee that they hire the best liars, not the best employees. So why do the survey testing? It just doesn't make any sense.

It sounds like at this particular company, some where along the line someone made it "company policy" to give this stupid test to potential hirees and so they keep giving it (as in twinplets JC Penny example) regardless of whether or not it assists in any way in making good hiring choices. In my experience, some pretty stupid things happen because of "company policy". Once something becomes part of the "company policy", people just don't question it anymore even when it is obvious that it is completely obsolete.

I think it is also likely that the "this is my Kingdom" ego/attitude has a lot to do with it. The head of HR may actually be bothered by the fact that most of the people he or she hires are so much more intelligent than him or herself that making engineers take a stupid "personality" survey is his or her way of getting back at all those "brainiacs" that apply for jobs there. You might be amazed at just how petty and small some people can be when they think they are the big fish in the sea.

It is even possible that the HR dept people actually don't know that the test is stupid. They learned in college or wherever that this the tool you should use and they think the test is actaully a valid way to measure the morality of a person.

Those test are not designed to determine anything. They know that you cannot find out the true nature of a person by a simple questionnaire. They are designed to cover them legally if you do something way out of line in the future as their employee. This way they can show the civil courts (when the lawsuits start flying)...that they had done all they could to screen out imbalanced people. They know what you had said had made sense...but they also figured you should have known the real reason. It is legal protection for them. If you don't fall within the parameters of a rational and sensible person on paper...so they can demonstrate that your answers fall within the majority on a bell curve...they can be sued big time. In this day and age...it is all about liability.

That and...as was said in the above posts...HR just looks at the requirements they were handed down. It is about numbers that fit in and about attitudes that they feel won't.

There will be times where you are issued instructions that, at first, don't make sense...but you must remember...(absent immoral, illegal, unethical actions)...you don't have to like it...you just have to do it. They are looking for people who have the flexibility to just shut up and do it their way.
Creativity and innovation can come with some experience...know what they expect...know the parameters of your duties...then freestyle a little.

In the future, please remember the answers given here...they are about true expectations throughout life.

I agree with Kuma that there is a certain amount of legal CYA going on with the test, although I think the reasons behind it are multiple.

Having interviewed dozens of people in my time, and been very good at it, the first thing to realize is that it is actually very difficult to tell who will be a good employee from a resume or even an interview. It is, actually, very much an art. Yet in a world where companies must show they have not discriminated, there is little room to rely solely on that intangible instinct that says, "this will be a good employee." So larger companies try to quantify what cannot be quantified, to make the paperwork trail look as if they have been "fair."

Another factor is that companies can receive literally hundreds of resumes for a position. To narrow it down in a way that appears fair, they will add screening factors like personality tests. I still don't think it's a great method, but having stared at 200 resumes for an assistant for my husband earlier this year, I can't argue with anything that helps you decide where to start. There is no way to meet personally with 200 people, and so many had interesting stories, and pretty much all were officially qualified. If you can go on-line with something that helps you figure out some personality match traits, maybe that narrows it down.

I would say that I do NOT think there is a single set of "right" answers for most of these things. I would look for an entirely different personality at the firm I currently work for, than I used to at my prior job. While both are accounting jobs, the tone of the firms is entirely different, the pace of the work is different, and what the guy at the top values most is different. The kind of person who would have thrived in the old environment is not going to thrive in this one, and vice-a-versa (yeah, the current job is not a perfect fit for me, but it's a mile from home and my boss and I are both making compromises for different reasons).

I think you answer as best you can, and as honestly as you can, then cross your fingers. Maybe they'll look at it, maybe they won't. If they like you they aren't likely to toss you out over the results, although they may bring up any odd answers in an interview. In which case, you can answer, "I have Aspergers, I have no idea what "most" people think or do, and I don't like pretending that I do. But, your test asked the question so I guessed best I could."

I wonder if that sort of test could be challenged on ground of discrimination. Think about it, aren't questions about what "most people" think biased against people with AS? How is someone with AS supposed to answer that? It's part of your condition to NOT know, isn't it?

When it comes to having to give answers to poorly written questions, that is life. With practice you hone your instincts and get better at picking an answer. In most jobs there isn't time to dwell over poor choices; you pick A or B and you move on. So think of having to do that with a test like this as a way to see if you can make decisions. And the ability to make decisions even when you're clueless is an important part of most jobs.

All JHMO, of course. It's been years since I've worked for a company large enough to have an HR department or worry about dotting i's like that. I like life in the small firms, where someone hires you just because they've met you and believe in you. Even if it does mean I have no retirement of any sort

I could never pass any of those tests. That's because I answered them too honestly or tried to thinking of the scenarios I have never been in. Then I started to realize I should start lying on them to get the job but what would be the point? They would find out anyway what a liar I am. Probably one of the reasons why I have a hard time getting a job. Well that's why there are companies for people with disabilities to get them jobs. They don't have this questionnaire crap.

Oh yeah I had learned that when working a job, they do not want you correcting them or asking them why when they tell you to do things. They call it arguing and when I was at my interview here in Oregon, I was informed at the interview there be no arguing and I almost blurted out "I always get accused of that" because I knew if I said that, that could ruin my chance of getting the job. So when I worked there, I dared to not ask "why do I have to do this?" "Why can't (insert name here) do it?" and asking why is it this way. I did have slip ups sometimes but I always caught myself and there was never any trouble. I always had to restrain myself since the rule was "no arguing" and I knew those things be considered arguing since I was not agreeing.

So... Let me get this straight

Your saying that HR realizes that these tests are meaningless, yet they require the tests anyways because they aren't really interested in actually hiring good people? And that they are merely giving their tests because of 'company policy' that was made by somebody who didn't properly think this through, but yet nobody wants to question them or point out the problems because that might cause them trouble.

And furthermore, the people in the HR department use this as an arbitrary candidate pool reduction method despite the fact that it gives bad results. Because they have no easy and effective means of choosing the right employee, and giving a worthless test an easy way to weed out people, even if it doesn't select good candidate.

And also these tests can be used to prove that they have done employee screening to avoid problems, even though they know that these tests dont provide any such benefit. They are simply claiming effectiveness in order to cover their collective asses in the court system by lying about the perceived effectiveness of a system that they know to be flawed. As such the company is lying about doing effective screening, and the court system knows that they are lying, but yet they don't want to call them out as they cannot prove that they are lying even though they know that they are lying about these tests being useful.

And then people within the HR department take advantage of this bureaucratic waste, and use it to their own advantage to inflate their petty egos by enforcing pointless tests on others in order to make themselves feel powerful. And by questioning the worth of said tests, the HR people are offended that you aren't doing what they have asked, even if what they ask would require you to lie and provide false information that will be of no practical value. Because they value blind and unthinking obedience to arbitrary company policies over rational thought.

Is that it?

Please tell me that I am wrong because I hope that isn't the case.

No.
Question for you though, if the same questions come up again what will you do?

Remember, the written test is only the first qualifier. The oral board and your resume are the ones where they make the real decisions.